Dr. JAN LECIEJEWSKI (Lviv).

Size and form of frames.

Every beekeeper knows this that the honey hive itself does not sweat, but everyone also knows that the device, especially the internal one, contributes significantly to the volume of the trunk. The internal arrangement of the hive depends mainly on the size and form of the frames, because the size of the frame makes the hive wider or narrower, larger or smaller. So let's say a few words about frames: first of all, let's consider the size of the frames.

The size of frames in the world is very diverse, ranging from very small frames, measuring 396 cm2 in diameter, to very large frames with a capacity of 1680 cm2 in diameter, such as the Belgian frame. Involuntarily, the question arises why beekeepers from all over the world don't get together and establish a uniform size and form framework for all countries. The answer to such a question must be that such a resolution is simply impossible, because not all countries have the same climatic and territorial conditions, the same melliferous plants and in the same quantity, the same length of summer and winter, and therefore an equally long period of fruiting time, not to mention different breeds of bees and different education of beekeepers, and the development, prosperity and strength of the trunk depend on all these conditions. Therefore, there cannot be the same frame all over the world. Let's take into account, for example, climatic conditions (heat). New York, Southern France, Vienna, Crimea and Beijing have the same temperature. Scientifically speaking, we can say that the places mentioned above have the same isotherm, i.e. an equal line, the same degree of temperature. These places could therefore have equally arranged hives with equal frames, if other conditions, such as the number of honey-producing plants, were equal. A different isotherm is found, for example, in the Central United States of America, Spain, Nizza in Italy, Tiflis on the Caspian Sea, and another isotherm in the southern United States of America, Algeria, Syria and Baghdad in Persia. The places through which the isotherm passes: New Finland have a much colder climate. in America, Southern Norway, Berlin, Poznań, Congress Poland. Each of these isotherms has a completely different annual temperature, and therefore different precipitation, such as rain and snow, different, milder or sharper winds, and different vegetation depending on it. Therefore, we should talk about equal running of the apiary, an equal beehive and an equal frame. Everyone will understand that in a warmer country and with lush vegetation, the beehive must be arranged differently and the apiary should be run differently than in a cold country and with poor vegetation. So how can we transfer the beekeeping method, used e.g. in the central United States of America with an average annual temperature of 13·2°, to Germany or to us, with an average temperature of about 8° C? But not only different countries have different climatic and plant conditions, but even the same a country, if it covers a larger area, has different conditions in its parts, affecting the breeding and development of the apiary. Northern Germany has different temperature conditions than southern Germany; European Russia has a different climate and vegetation than Asian Russia; e.g. climatic influences, rainfall and plants in Russia, near Nizhny Novgorod, are different from those on the Black or Caspian Sea. Therefore, a beekeeper on the Black Sea has to manage things differently from those on the Neva River, which means that a beekeeper in the south will have a different hive than in the north, whether in Russia or the Czech Republic. We are not surprised, therefore, to learn that different countries use hives and frames of different sizes and shapes, and that each country praises and recommends its hives and its frame size and shape. But it does not follow from this that what is good and appropriate in one country or in one locality must also be appropriate and appropriate in another country or in another locality. This is also the case in the United States of Northern A1, which has an area of 9·4 million km2 and various annual temperatures (the eastern coast with New York 10·9° C, the central part with St. Louis 13·2° C, the western coast with San Francisco 12 ·7° C) frames of various sizes are used. The most commonly used are Quinby-Dadanta 47·5 cm 800 cm2 in the clear area, Draper 28·5X44, i.e. 1161 cm2 in the clear area. So there are two sizes facing each other: one by Draper, Quinby and Root with a capacity of 1200-1240 cm2 and the other by Danzenbaker and Langsroth with a capacity of 800-970 cm2. The difference between these two quantities becomes even more visible if we calculate the number of cells they contain. In frames of the first size there will be 9,600-9,920 cells on one frame, in case of the second size there will be 6,400-7,760 cells. Since 10 frames are usually used in the sporangium, there will be 96,000 to 99,000 cells for the first size, and 64,000 77,600 cells for the second one, i.e. the difference in the sporangium itself is 22-32 thousand cells, which means that the first frame size is calculated for greater fertility of the mother and stronger development of the trunk, i.e. for warmer areas and with more abundant vegetation, and the second frame size is related to lower fertility of the mother and less rich vegetation, which is justified by various temperature and rainfall conditions in large areas of the United States. So those who think that in the United States there is only one frame size, and a large one at that, are mistaken and want to introduce large frames to us as well: in America, beekeepers adapt their hives and frames to the conditions of the area in which they live.

The excellent results of American beekeepers combined with very favorable conditions for beekeeping caused European beekeepers to imitate America, and since it was believed that the main reason for the development of beekeeping and rich honey harvests was the size of the frame, the larger American frame was introduced in all European countries, regardless of completely different conditions. climatic and plant life in our hemisphere.

Belgium went the furthest, introducing a 42X42 cm frame, i.e. 1680 cm2 in light. The annual temperature is 9·05° C, but the climate is oceanic and mild, and average temperature fluctuations are insignificant, which may have a positive impact on the development of beekeeping. But what experiences have been made with this frame? - I can't say, because there has been no news from Belgium since 1914.

Switzerland changed the Quinby frame slightly, giving it a size of 43·5X30 cm, i.e. 1120 cm2 in light. This frame is called the Dadant-Blatt frame. In addition, an even larger Biirki frame was introduced, 28·6X48 cm, i.e. 1250 cm2. Each of these two frames has its supporters who argue with each other and with the supporters of the old frame, half the size. This fight, of course only on paper, continues and is not resolved. It should be mentioned, however, that the climate of Switzerland is very different from the climate of the United States and it is doubtful whether the American frame will be able to remain unchanged in Switzerland.

France used to use frames that were larger, or at least smaller, than the American ones. The Adair frame 34X28·5, i.e. 864 cm2 in the light area, the Layans frame 33X31 cm, i.e. 962 cm2 in the light area, and the Voirudt frame 33X33 cm, i.e. 990 cm2 in the light area, are among the older ones; these frames were later enlarged and Layens to 33X41 cm, i.e. 1280 cm2, and Voirnot to 35X45 cm, i.e. 1450 cm2 in light. In addition, a Dadant-Blatt frame is also used, as in Switzerland. Due to this variety of frames, the French Central Association of Beekeepers introduced a general frame to be applicable to all beekeepers, a frame of 32X43 = 1280 cm2 in light. But this frame did not find general acceptance, so the French beekeepers' congress introduced a new square frame 35X35 cm = 1120 cm2, thus increasing the confusion even more. Before the war, i.e. before 1914, there was no final agreement in this respect and the difference of opinion regarding the frames was great, and since the fierce last war occupied too much the minds of everyone in France, the issue of frames is not resolved there even today. In any case, there is a tendency in France to introduce a larger frame, which is justified because the air temperature in France is approaching that in the United States. The average annual temperature in France is: on the Brittany coast, 11·4°, and in the south, on the Mediterranean coast, 13·8°. Therefore, if the vegetation is equally lush, it can be assumed that the larger frame will find general recognition and uniformity.

England is the most conservative in this respect. They usually use a frame introduced by the English Beekeeping Association, 36X22 cm = 720 cm2. This is a frame used for the English climate, which is similar to ours. The annual average temperature is: in the Hebrides 8·6° C, on the east coast of Scotland 7·8° C, on the southwest coast of Ireland 10·5° C, in the eastern part of England 9·8° C. In recent years, England to introduce a larger American frame, but due to war events I have no information as to what the result was.

I also have little information about frames used in Italy. I only know that they use a congress frame 25·5X 42 cm = 960 cm2. It is a medium-sized frame, not excessively large, although the temperature and rich vegetation would allow for a larger frame; instead of a larger frame, more frames could be used, e.g. 12 instead of 10. The average annual temperature is: around Milan 12·5° C, around Genoa 15·5° C, around Naples 15·8° C, around Lecce 16° 6° C, and around Palermo even 17·3° C.

Alsace and Lorraine also uses a medium-sized Simona frame 32X32 cm = 960 cm2, next to a small union frame 24·8X32 = 690 cm2 in light and Bastian 24X32 = 680 cm2 in light. Only recently, before the war, the Layens frame was introduced, almost the same size as the Simon frame, 33X31. The war interrupted further research in this direction.

Germany has the greatest diversity in frame size, with almost every province having a different frame size. The oldest frame is the Berlepsch frame 18·5X22·5 cm = 350 cm2 in light. This frame is undoubtedly too small; Berlepsch built his hive on four floors to give the trunk the opportunity to develop properly and have room to produce honey, but such a hive has the disadvantage that working with 40 frames in one hive is burdensome and takes a lot of time. Therefore, the so-called a normal frame, 37X22·5 cm = 750 cm2, which, because it was very high, was divided into 2 half-frames and also because such a high frame could not be placed in the honey house. This frame was corrected by Gerstung to 26X41 cm = 960 cm2 in light, which he also divided into 2 half-frames. The frame found quite extensive use throughout Germany, especially in Thuringia, but not generally. Württemberg is of a similar size, 27·2X36 cm = 900 cm2 in the light, and the other one is 30X30 = 812 cm2 in the light. Badenia uses a frame of 24X42 cm = 920 cm2 in the light, next to the normal one 22·3X28 cm = 750 cm2 in the light. Before the war, the Junginger frame 37X30 cm2 = 1050 cm2 in light was introduced. Saxony uses a frame of 25X40 cm = 900 cm2, which can be divided into 2 half frames. In Swabia the same frames are used as in Württemberg. In Rhenish Hesse and Westphalia we find a frame of 27·8X42 cm = 1060 cm2 in light, which is a larger frame. In southern Germany a frame 22·3X25 cm = 500 cm2 in light is used. Other German provinces have frames or baskets of similar size, such as Hannover and Luneburg, so there is no need to talk about them separately, especially since the variety of frame sizes is even greater in Austria. I will only mention the most important innovations here. The frame of the main Viennese beekeepers' association has dimensions of 25X39 cm = 900 cm2, Lower Austria has a frame of 23·8 X 42 cm = 860 cm2 in light. In the Berchtesgaden hive we see a frame of 40 X 25 cm = 900 cm2 in light. In Moravia, a four-story union hive with a frame of 13X 23·8 cm = 260 cm2 in light is common, it is a miniature frame.

The Czechs use various beehives and, therefore, frames of various sizes. The Czech neutral frame has a size of 26·3X26·3 cm = 600 cm2 in light. In the Schulz hive we have a frame of 37 X 22·5 cm = 750 cm2 in the light, in the Szwarc hive we use a frame of 39 X 24 cm and 40X25 cm = about 900 cm2 in the light. The frame in the Hlinecki hive is 27 X 44 6 cm = 1100 cm2.

In Hungary, the most common beehive is the Hungarian union hive with a frame of 24X37 cm = 800 cm2 in light.

A few years before the war, all these countries began to introduce a larger American model, which found many supporters and even more opponents. There was a fight between beekeepers for and against the new direction, which took place on the pages of all beekeeping magazines. Some days praised the new direction to the skies, others did not spare harsh criticism of the new approach. In general, however, supporters of the new direction are in the minority, and the introduction of new frames is limited to individual units and does not cover all beekeepers. The whole matter is actually only at an initial stage, because often one and the same beekeeper has in his apiary, next to numerous hives of the older system, only a few, sometimes even just 2-3 newer hives for testing purposes. None of the major beekeeping societies have so far declared categorically in favor of introducing new frames, leaving the initiative in this respect to individual members and waiting, quite rightly, for further experience. It takes longer to judge the advantages and disadvantages of the new frames and the new beehive system connected to them. And there are many disadvantages here, as we will see later.

Let's move on to our relations. So far, in Galicia there are almost exclusively streets, i.e. Slavic, or rather Galician, because no other Slavic nation adopted it. Its frame has a size of 22·7X 48 cm = 1000 cm2 in light. This frame is relatively large and would even be too large if 10 such frames, i.e. 78,400 cells, were intended for the sporangium alone. Meanwhile, this number of cells is intended for the sporangium and the honey house, because the Galician hive, the only one in the world, does not have a separate honey house, which again is not enough for both sections, because with normal redness, 2 frames remain for honey production in the summer, which, as I showed in my dissertation: "Mathematical basis of beekeeping" (Bartnik progressive, 1919, No. 1), is too little. In any case, the Galician frame is one of the larger frames and 8 such frames are enough for a sporangium.

In the Poznań region, under German influence, Gerstung frames are currently used mainly in the sporangium of whole frames or 2 rows of half-frames, in the honeycomb of only half-frames, the size of 960 cm 2 or 480 cm 2 in the clear area. In Congress Poland it is in use, next to the former frame of Fr. Dolinowskiego 24 X 44 cm = 1100 cm2 in the light, Lewicki frame 30X40 cm = 950 cm2 in the light. All these frames, if they are used in a honey house in number 10, are too large, because in our climatic and honey-producing conditions, as I showed in the dissertation, it is enough: "Nowy typ ul" (Bartnik progressive 1918 no. 3) and "Ul, t. "wielkopolski" (Pasiecznik exemplary 1918, p. 109), a frame with a capacity of 825 cm2 in the light, 10 in the sporangium, is sufficient, which gives a total of 66,000 cells. It's better to give more frames in honey.

The American hive has recently been introduced in our country, but so far only here and there, so we do not often find mention of it in our beekeeping literature, and a broader study on it has not even had time to develop.

I will only mention Russia, where frames of various sizes are used. The Volkovsky frame has dimensions of 23X41 cm = 900 cm2 in the light, the Molchakin frame 23X37 cm = 770 cm2 in the light, the Zubarev frame 40X26 cm = 950 cm2 in the light and the Borisovsky frame in Central Russia 30X55 cm = 1537 cm2 in the light. The above frames, especially the last one, are too large for Russia and its climatic conditions, with the exception of Molchakin's frame, which can also be used in the northern parts of Russia. Only in the very south, on the Black Sea and similar areas, larger frames could be introduced.

Russia, eager for all new things, turned out to be eager for innovations when it comes to frames. All possible frame sizes have been introduced here: some use Langstroth frames, others Root, others Quinby, others Dadant-Blatt, others Danzenbaker, and even Layens. If we remember that in addition to the frames mentioned above, there are also older frames in use, we can easily imagine what confusion there is regarding frames and beehive systems in Russia. This confusion naturally becomes apparent in beekeeping magazines, where polemics about hive systems were fought very fiercely before the war, but, in my opinion, partly in vain. What may be good for warm southern Russia will be quite unsuitable for cold northern Russia. Polemics in this direction have not yet led to positive results.

I am not mentioning other European countries because I have no information about the Pyrenees peninsula, and the South Slavic countries and the Greeks have developed their own type of beehives and frames, but are currently introducing foreign systems, mainly American ones, which may find suitable use here. climatic conditions, similar to the American ones. The average annual temperature around Ragusa (Dubrovnik) is 16·5° C, on the eastern coast of Bulgaria it is about 12·1° C, and in Atenaeh it is 17·7° C.

This concludes the review of frame sizes and moves on to the shape of frames. The latter may be of two types: the former wązkowysoka, i.e. the height exceeds the width, as e.g. in the Galician morning and the wide-low, i.e. the width is much greater than the height, e.g. in the American frame. The Galician frame is, as we know, 48 cm high and 22·7 cm wide; so it is narrow-tall. If we place the same frame sideways, so that the length of 48 cm will be the upper and lower bars, and the former upper or lower bar of 22·7 cm will become the side strip, then we will get a wide-low frame. And it is this form of frame that has occupied the minds of beekeepers in recent times and has resulted - naturally - in a new system of hives which, both in the sporangium and in the honey house, have a large, often twice the width of the old hive, and therefore a much smaller, sometimes halved height of the old hive. This caused a significant revolution in beekeeping. Hives in which these frames are used are opened not from the back or side, but from above, and the honeycombs, which have frames half the height of the holes in the sporangium, are placed on the sporangia and are therefore removable. Because they are very low, sometimes only 10 cm high, you can put 2 or 3 of these honeycombs on top of them, as needed. In winter, the honeycomb is removed and the roof is placed directly on the sporangium. Such a hive was briefly described and depicted in the drawing in Pasiecznik pattern (1918, page 165). This is the Root system hive; other American beehive systems have a slightly different form.

Everyone will know from the above presentation that the economy in such hives must be different from the economy in older hives. If I talked earlier about the fight between the supporters of new, large frames and the supporters of the old, smaller frames, this refers precisely to the difference between a wide frame and a narrow-high frame, i.e. the system of hives with new and old frames. Since the difference of opinions and views on both systems of frames and hives must be significant, and the exchange of ideas is often heated, it is natural, even necessary and beneficial, as long as the polemic does not take on a personal tone. Such a factual exchange of ideas can best contribute to explaining the good and bad features of the new system of hives and to forming an impartial judgment about the matter itself.

Let's get to know the views of both sides of the dispute. Supporters of the new system claim:

a) A hive that opens from the top makes it possible to take out any frame without removing the others, which has to be done in a hive that opens from the back or front, where, if I want to look at, for example, the fourth frame, I have to first remove the three frames in front of it, and this takes a lot time.

b) A low frame means that the bees will build it to the very bottom and pour honey over it faster than a narrow and high frame. This is particularly beneficial in a honeyhouse, which the bees will quickly fill with honey, so that you can quickly either shake the honey out on the honey extractor or place a second honeypot under the first one directly on the sporangium, and the bees will quickly fill the second, and in this case also the third, honeyhouse with honey. Then, when you remove 2 or 3 honey pots, you immediately have a larger amount of honey.

c) Bees hibernate better because the bees have less space to heat.

d) Cleaning the hive is easier because the floor is not attached to the hive, the hive rises, the floor is removed, another floor is placed and the hive is cleared of garbage at the bottom. The removed floor of the first hive is swept up and placed under the second one, from the second one under the third one and so on

The opponents answer: a) A hive that opens from the top makes it possible to pull out each frame, but it exposes the trunk to cold, because the cold air immediately enters the entire interior and all the compartments between the combs and causes the brood to catch cold and continue to rot. It is true that, as supporters of new hives defend, you can always expose part of the covering above the sporangium, but if you want to see 2 or 3 frames, you have to gradually expose the entire covering of the sporangium, which is dangerous. In the case of hives that open at the back or front, the air influence almost only affects the first frame, which protects the other frames behind it from the air current, especially since the remaining combs are densely occupied by bees and protect them from catching cold. In addition, when the comb is pulled out from the inside, the bees sitting on it get crushed, especially when the comb is densely occupied by bees. To avoid this, you need to remove the patch very evenly and slowly, which also takes some time. When removing combs from the back or front, there is much less crushing of bees, because by moving the frame to the frame, there is no rubbing of comb against comb and the bees have more time to disperse.

In addition, bees burst from the entire hive at once when it is open at the top, which makes work in the hive difficult, especially since it is not appropriate to smoke all the combs, because where can the bees go before the smoke? in this case, the smoke drives the bees outside the hive. In case of hives that are opened at the back or front, bees are always collected from only one comb, while the bees have time and the opportunity to retreat behind the next comb. As a result, they do not attack the beekeeper so violently and do not disturb him in his work so much.

Manipulating the combs is also not easy, because if you want to rearrange the combs, you cannot stop at just pulling out one comb, but you have to pull out at least the one that needs to be replaced first and put it aside, just like in the hives of the old system. When I want to look for the queen, I cannot stop at taking out one frame and putting it back in its original place, and then taking out individual frames and putting them back in, because the queen would never be found, because she would move from one frame to another and disappear from the beekeeper's eyes. Therefore, you have to put the frames aside again and only after finding the queen, put them back in their original place, and the entire sporangium will be exposed.

b) The claim that bees will build a low-wide frame sooner than a narrow-wide one is a delusion, because if the frame has an area of, for example, 800 cm2, the bees need the same time to build it whether it is lying or hanging, because the space is the same. It is true that a nested swarm will pull down a snake in a low lying frame rather than a high hanging one, but the supporters of the new concept remain silent that a snake pulled down by a swarm in lying frames does not reach the sides of the slats and there is a vacuum on both sides of the patch pulled down, which in winter does not contribute to good wintering. and if the swarm pulls the entire patch, there will be fewer such patches than those not pulled all the way to the bottom in narrow-high frames. Which of these two events is more beneficial for the bees? - that's another question.

c) The claim that cleaning by lifting the hive and moving the clean floor is a great help is at least exaggerated, because lifting a hive filled with 10 frames, full of brood or honey, is not easy and requires great strength, which not everyone, especially the elderly, can do. a beekeeper can do it. And what if the hive has 1 or 2 honey supers? Then it will be difficult even for a strong person to lift such a hive. In the hives of the old system, it is a matter of fun to sweep the garbage from the bottom of the hive, which is not so much anymore.

We should not forget that removing the honey pots themselves, i.e. the supers over the sporangia into which the bees lay honey, is associated with some difficulty. These extensions must be placed on the rebate for accuracy. The bees will, naturally, cover the place of deposition with putty, so that a chisel and prying is needed to detach the super from the sporangium, and this causes noise and anxiety for the bees.

d) As for the supposedly good wintering of bees in the hives of the new system, it is not as excellent as its supporters claim. Bees move during winter, as every beekeeper knows, from the bottom to the top of the frame. If this frame is low, the bees will soon reach the upper bar and, having eaten all the honey from the comb, they are doomed to death.

There will still be honey on both sides of such a frame, because the bees, concentrated in a ball, will not cover the entire width of such a frame, and they will not move sideways and will not benefit from this honey. Let's assume, however, that under good conditions they will move to one side, e.g. the right one; then they will eat this small amount from the right side, but if this is not enough, they will no longer go to the left side, because the middle between the right and left side is eaten up and over it, like an empty slice, they will no longer move to the left. This happens often, especially in cold countries. In Russian magazines I often encountered descriptions of similar incidents and complaints about poor wintering in the hives of the new system. And it confirms what I said before, that not every hive is suitable for every country. In warmer climates, where the winter is mild and short, such a low frame is enough, because already in early spring the hibernating bees can relax without harm to themselves and draw food from the side parts of the comb, but in colder countries, with a harsh and long winter, the cluster of bees must sit tight for a long time to generate adequate heat, and cannot relax without fear of freezing and move to one side or another after the honey in the center of the comb has been consumed.

These are the views for and against the new system. One could conclude from this that hives with low-wide frames are not suitable for our climate, to which I am inclined. However, I do not want to resolve this issue, because I have not worked in the hives of the new system myself and have not made any experiments in this direction, and I do not like to recommend or condemn what I have not experienced myself. I could recommend the Wielkopolska hive because I experienced it and it turned out to be excellent.

Perhaps other beekeepers have already made more thorough tests in this respect; so maybe they would speak out on this issue and give their opinion; but this court should be impartial and honest. Let them reveal not only the advantages, but also the disadvantages of the mentioned hives, so that readers can form their own judgment about them.

To complete my article, I must also mention that the frames can also have a square form, but the hive was to have a cubic form, so that the height and width of the hive were the same. At first glance it seems rational, but in practice such a hive turned out to be unsuitable.

Round frames in the form of hoops were also tried; They were proposed by Vonhof, an engineer from Bremen. They turned out to be even less practical than the previous ones, because not only were they difficult to hang in the hive to prevent them from wobbling, but also, due to the heat in the hive and the weight caused by the honey, they elongated and bent, as a result of which the combs broke.

The last form of frame that has gained some popularity is a frame with a bow instead of an upper bar. As we know, German beekeepers in the Luneburg Forest use bees until then. Wanting to make the interior of these baskets movable, CJH Gravenhort gave them an oblong shape, equal everywhere, with a vaulted top; the gable walls have a semi-curved shape. This basket falls over, like any other, when you want to operate in it; In accordance with this form of the basket, Gravenhorst also designed semi-bow-shaped frames that are inserted from the bottom, i.e. after turning the basket over. So this is starting the cart. At first, people liked this vaulted basket with its frames and it was strongly promoted. However, its shortcomings soon became apparent. You cannot place such baskets in layers, one on top of the other, but this is a minor disadvantage. Tipping over such a basket requires a lot of strength, and you also need to have a suitable saw to prevent the round-topped basket from tipping over. It is also very inconvenient to ensure and properly fasten the frames in the hive, as they often slide out and fall out when being turned over and placed, which causes the combs to deteriorate.

As we can see from the above list, the mind of beekeepers has worked and is constantly working on the form and size of frames, and therefore on the improvement of bee housing. This is a comforting sign because it proves that beekeepers in general are thinking. And although not all thoughts and ideas are good and beneficial, and some may even be harmful, they are always better than mental deadness, because they give rise to other thoughts, inventions, and often also actions.